Apple on Friday revealed that development on Aperture, its professional-grade photo editing application, has ceased, leaving Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro as its only remaining flagship pro-oriented Mac apps.

The news was broken to Jim Dalrymple of The Loop, who also revealed that iPhoto, Apple's consumer-level photo app, will be discontinued as well.

Both applications are due to be replaced by Apple's forthcoming Photos application, which will be included with iOS 8 and eventually bundled with OS X Yosemite, although the Mac version isn't set to launch until early 2015.

Apple did make it clear that development of Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro will continue.

"With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture," said Apple in its statement. "When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X."

The company also said in a statement toTechCrunch that it will provide compatibility updates to Aperture, allowing it to run on OS X Yosemite. However, further support will not exist after that.

Apple also said it is working with Adobe to help users transition to its Lightroom app for Mac.

Included with the reports was a new picture of the OS X Photos application, as seen above. From the picture, it would appear that the application has a "prosumer" layout. The app is also shown with a darker user interface, which is different from the predominantly white app shown off at the Worldwide Developers Conference earlier this month, as shown below.

Aperture hasn't seen a major update since 2010, when version 3.0 of the suite launched with 64-bit support, along with "Faces" and "Places" for sorting pictures. Its chief competitor for professional photographers is Adobe's Lightroom.

As for iPhoto, its last major update came in 2011, as part of the iLife '11 suite release. iPhoto also debuted on the iPad in 2012, and later came to Apple's iPhone for more advanced photo editing on the go.

Damn... I don't use either one (I prefer GIMP for cross-platform compatibility), but there's a lot of folks who do professionally. I know a few, and I bet they're all going to say the same thing:"WTF?"

Anyone know how similar/familiar the Photos app is interface and file-format-wise?

Damn... I don't use either one (I prefer GIMP for cross-platform compatibility), but there's a lot of folks who do professionally. I know a few, and I bet they're all going to say the same thing:"WTF?"

Anyone know how similar/familiar the Photos app is interface and file-format-wise?

I don't think the Photos app exists yet. Apple gave a slight preview at WWDC but said it won't be available until next year.

Well, the Aperture news is surprising and disappointing. Hopefully this means Apple will be buying Adobe.

I completely agree. I recently upgraded to Aperture because iPhoto just doesn't cut it in terms of functionality for a large photo library. This is even more surprising because the new Photos app doesn't seem to be anymore than a retooled iPhoto with a new name. It isn't a true comparison. Apple should just come out and say is that they are abandoning the professional photo software market entirely. That would be more honest. I'm sure there will be people who say, "You can still use Aperture.". But, the question will be, for how long? At some point in the future, it may no longer be compatible with some future version of OS X.

I find this decision strange. With the introduction of the new Mac Pro, Apple seemed to have affirmed its commitment to the pro market. Abandoning one of their pro apps just doesn't make much sense. I could see if they decided to discontinue the Mac Pro and all pro apps entirely to focus only on consumers. But, that's not what they did.

Damn... I don't use either one (I prefer GIMP for cross-platform compatibility), but there's a lot of folks who do professionally. I know a few, and I bet they're all going to say the same thing:"WTF?"

Anyone know how similar/familiar the Photos app is interface and file-format-wise?

Pros are already being forced into Adobe's Creative Cloud subscription model where Lightroom is available as part of the package.

Shit. While there was really no development here for years, it was still the best option for RAW organisation and basic editing on the Mac, Lightroom is abysmal in this regard, and their module based workflow is absolutely not for me.

Let's hope that Photos will not be a completely dumbed down solution, but if it swaps Aperture's fine library and backup handling for the cloud, I have little interest.

I knew there was some reason why I never bought Aperture. Tempted to, never did. Mostly because I could do pretty much all I needed to do with iPhoto plus Pixelmator. Aperture's batch processing workflow was pretty cool, but I'd still rarely ever use it, and if I really wanted to, I could write an Automator script for iPhoto and Pixelmator or something.

Long-term, Apple needs software partners. They will probably benefit more from having 3rd party pro apps on OS X than they would if they sold pro apps themselves. For example, as much as Adobe's bloatware sucks, it's become the de facto standard. Adobe is the Microsoft of creatives.

I wish this photo app comes earlier
iPhoto at first was good now meh
Can't really work with external hd with airport
I wish it could upgrade airport to better work with external hd
Can't wait hope it comes WITH Yosemite at no addition $$$$

As long as Photos is a sharp improvement on iPhoto, with a lot of the Aperture features included, I don't actually mind.

My only gripe is that if Photos is more like iPhoto than Aperture, it leaves you with little choice as a "prosumer". I'm told that Lightroom is pretty good, but I really object to having to subscribe to software.

I'm sure there will be people who say, "You can still use Aperture.". But, the question will be, for how long? At some point in the future, it may no longer be compatible with some future version of OS X.

True, however I am still running Final Cut Express 3.5 without issue. I recently had to do a clean install and it was a PITA because, while the app itself is Universal, the installer is PowerPC. I had to install the content from each disk manually on the command-line. But the application itself still works just as well today as it did in 2006 (under 10.5 Leopard).

I'm not saying there aren't architectural changes taking place in OS X that won't obsolete Aperture tomorrow, but there's a good bet it will still function for some years to come.

The bigger issue is how much functionality you lose by sticking with a product that hasn't seen a significant update in about four years. I love Aperture's free workflow environment but have considered switching to Lightroom for some features that are missing in Aperture. Now I guess I will take the plunge.

Wow, this is pretty shocking. iPhoto I can definitely understand, keeping both would create too much confusion, redundancy, and complications. But Aperture? Seems that serves a completely different use. It does not even come with OSX, its an optional paid download, so I dont understand the need to eliminate it. There's probably alot we don't know, lately Apple has shown renewed focus on its pro apps, and I dont see them just dropping this with no alternative.

Although surprising that Apple is leaving the Pro market after releasing their new Mac Pro, more surprising is the fact they are leaving the "i" for just Photos. I wonder if this is going to be a broader move across all apps.

Buying Adobe would be really cool and I think fits well with Apple. Starts with A, ends with E, same amount of letters... :)

2. Send feedback to apple.com/feedback once Photos is out, telling them which missing Aperture features (if any) are important to you.

3. Keep using Aperture until Photos can meet your needs. Aperture still exists.

4. I hear good things about Lightroom. Which is surreal to me, since everything I have personally experienced from Adobe in recent years has been negative! But it's nice to have options.

Precisely because Adobe has turned so many people off with their subscription-only pricing model (and the expensive app pricing before that), Apple should have continued to provide alternatives.

Furthermore, this reinforces the notion that you shouldn't buy apps, especially pro-apps, from Apple because there is no commitment over the long term that they'll continue to support those apps. So even though they claim they're going to support the pro video and audio apps, who really knows?

And it also reinforces the notion that Macs aren't for pros anymore. But if Photos has all the functionality of Aperture, then it's all fine.

IMO, very bad moves by Apple (unless they are buying Adobe, but I doubt there's any reality to that).

Apple is planning on making Photos the solution for both consumers and pros. Photography is becoming increasingly important to Apple every year as they improve the quality of their cameras and the software that supports them. The Photos app will incorporate the same type of technology seen in iOS 8 where there is an easy way to make automatic adjustments to photos but also give you access to the finer controls if you want to use them. I don't think we'll lose functionality from Aperture. It'll just be in a new package.

Probably everything from Aperture will be available in the new Photos app. Everyone will get the Pro tools for free if true. I wouldn't worry until we see what the Photos app will do.

That would really surprise me. Photos (like iPhoto) will be targeted at folks taking pictures with their iPhones. While I can see the obvious (and currently missing from iPhoto) features (such as straightening, non-destructive editing, brushes, and some of the color tools) being ported over, I'd be surprised if they could include some of the more advanced features such as organization, stacks, lift & stamp (to name only a few) without confusing people like my mother.

This is disgusting. Apple sells its loyal pro customers to notoriously greedy, subscriptions-only, buggy, non-OSX-compliant Adobe.
Even with upgraded iCloud storage up to 1TB would my photo library not fit on iCloud and the nerve it takes for Apple to suggest that anything but throwaway pictures be "secured" in the cloud in the post-Snowden era is just an outright insult to our intelligence.

Apple is planning on making Photos the solution for both consumers and pros. Photography is becoming increasingly important to Apple every year as they improve the quality of their cameras and the software that supports them. The Photos app will incorporate the same type of technology seen in iOS 8 where there is an easy way to make automatic adjustments to photos but also give you access to the finer controls if you want to use them. I don't think we'll lose functionality from Aperture. It'll just be in a new package.

Does this mean that all my photos will be required to be stored in the cloud, to use the Photos app? If so, it's a huge fail because many of us just don't have that kind of bandwidth. And often are working totally offline.

This story is so bereft of detail (both here on AI and elsewhere) that it qualifies as TROLLING because of the FUD it stirs up!

It's the few that were sitting on the fence - waiting in hope - who will be affected, and who, incidentally, should have also moved to Lightroom a long time ago. Well now they can.

Why should I have moved a long time ago? I mean, I thought about moving, but I "waited in hope" that Aperture would come up to par soon with Lightroom and I would be able to avoid the pain of migrating a rather large library over and the loss of the unrestricted workflow that Aperture gives you.

Yes, in hindsight, I should have moved. But yesterday I had no way of knowing Apple had dropped future development of Aperture.

This is even more surprising because the new Photos app doesn't seem to be anymore than a retooled iPhoto with a new name

That sounds to me like they are just making the apps part of the OS, like they do with iTunes. Sure, every Mac comes with iPhoto and other apps previous under the grouping iLife (which at one time included iTunes) but this will mean it will get updated with the OS. This will probably allow for better integration with their iCloud-based services. Right now, they might be hobbled by customers not caring about spending $10(?) for the new iPhoto on an older Mac even if it's running the latest version of Mavericks so it's probably a decision to strengthen their ecosystem.

Quote:

Apple should just come out and say is that they are abandoning the professional photo software market entirely. That would be more honest.

Saying they will no longer develop Aperture seems very clear to me.

Quote:

I find this decision strange. With the introduction of the new Mac Pro, Apple seemed to have affirmed its commitment to the pro market. Abandoning one of their pro apps just doesn't make much sense. I could see if they decided to discontinue the Mac Pro and all pro apps entirely to focus only on consumers. But, that's not what they did.

I am not a photographer but I do some and I don't think any of them use Aperture. Aren't there better solutions out there? I'd think if they are abandoning it that the number of customers aren't high enough to warrant the expense cost of development.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Why should I have moved a long time ago? I mean, I thought about moving, but I "waited in hope" that Aperture would come up to par soon with Lightroom and I would be able to avoid the pain of migrating a rather large library over and the loss of the unrestricted workflow that Aperture gives you.

Yes, in hindsight, I should have moved. But yesterday I had no way of knowing Apple had dropped future development of Aperture.

I am one of those who has been using Aperture from version 1.0. I hate Lightroom because it imposes a workflow and interface on you that just doesn't make sense to me. I love Aperture and have been hoping upon hope that we would see lens corrections and real non destructive plugin support. I am seriously shocked at this unofficial way of announcing such an important decision. They could have just as well announced this years ago or say so clearly now that photos will be a worthy successor. The description above is just faff!

To the people who think this won't be a feature loss:
- why would Apple work with Adobe to transition Aperture users to Lightroom if all of Aperture's features would remain?
- no mention of a plugin architecture for the new app
- no verbiage like with finalcut pro x that it's targeting pros, etc.
Apple is quickly losing its aim by turning everything into a closed consumer only platform with no decent alternative: neither windows nor Linux have what apple's pro segment offered.
If Apple wants to be a content oriented consumer company then it shouldn't forget that content needs a creation platform, too.
Professionals can hold out on old software for a while but then what?

Oh I dunno - again, hindsight. Apple had been dropping minor updates over the years adding minor functionality enhancements as recently as late last year. I think that's what kept my hope alive that they hadn't abandoned us completely. I've been on Aperture since 1.0, having attended one of their traveling workshops to introduce the software (back when it was $500). I'm disappointed.

I am one of those who has been using Aperture from version 1.0. I hate Lightroom because it imposes a workflow and interface on you that just doesn't make sense to me. I love Aperture and have been hoping upon hope that we would see lens corrections and real non destructive plugin support. I am seriously shocked at this unofficial way of announcing such an important decision. They could have just as well announced this years ago or say so clearly now that photos will be a worthy successor. The description above is just faff!

^^^^^^ this. I suppose I'll get used to the workflow Lightroom imposes. I just wish I didn't have to.